Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Anatomy-Specific Pancreatic Stump Management to Reduce the Risk of Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreatic Head Resection

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The anatomical status of the pancreatic remnant after a pancreatic head resection varies greatly among patients. The aim of the present study was to improve management of the pancreatic remnant for reducing pancreatic fistula after pancreatic head resection.

Methods

Ninety-five consecutive patients who underwent an end-to-side, duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatic head resection were included in the study. To approximate the pancreatic stump to the jejunum, the transfixing and interrupted suture techniques were used in 51 and 44 patients, respectively. We modified the interrupted suture technique according to the anatomical status of the pancreatic remnant, i.e., the shape of the pancreatic stump and the location of the pancreatic duct.

Results

There was no operative mortality in this study. Overall, 14 patients (15%) developed a clinically relevant pancreatic fistula. Certain anatomical features, including a small pancreatic duct, a soft, nonfibrotic pancreatic gland, and a pancreatic duct adjacent to the posterior cut edge, were significantly associated with pancreatic fistula. The fistula rate in the interrupted suture group was 7%, lower than that (22%) in the transfixing suture group (P = 0.036), and it was not influenced by pancreatic anatomy. Multivariate analysis identified a nonfibrotic pancreas (versus fibrotic pancreas; odds ratio [OR] 12.58, 95% CI 1.2–23.9; P = 0.001), a soft pancreas (versus hard pancreas; OR 4.67, CI 1.2–51.1; P = 0.006), and the transfixing suture technique (versus interrupted suture technique; OR 9.91, CI 1.7–57.5; P = 0.003) as significant predictors of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula.

Conclusions

Pancreatic anastomosis modified according to the pancreatic anatomy is effective in reducing the risk of pancreatic fistula formation with end-to-side, duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatic head resection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Balcom JH IV, Rattner DW, Warshaw AL et al (2001) Ten-year experience with 733 pancreatic resections: changing indications, older patients, and decreasing length of hospitalization. Arch Surg 136:391–398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lin JW, Cameron JL, Yeo CJ et al (2004) Risk factors and outcomes in postpancreaticoduodenectomy pancreaticocutaneous fistula. J Gastrointest Surg 8:951–959

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. de Castro SM, Busch OR, van Gulik TM et al (2005) Incidence and management of pancreatic leakage after pancreatoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 92:1117–1123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kazanjian KK, Hines OJ, Eibl G et al (2005) Management of pancreatic fistulas after pancreaticoduodenectomy: results in 437 consecutive patients. Arch Surg 140:849–854

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Miedema BW, Sarr MG, van Heerden JA et al (1992) Complications following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Current management. Arch Surg 127:945–949

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Yeh TS, Jan YY, Jeng LB et al (1997) Pancreaticojejunal anastomotic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy-multivariate analysis of perioperative risk factors. J Surg Res 67:119–125

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Maher MM et al (1995) A prospective randomized trial of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 222:580–588

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. van Berge Henegouwen MI, De Wit LT, Van Gulik TM et al (1997) Incidence, risk factors, and treatment of pancreatic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy: drainage versus resection of the pancreatic remnant. J Am Coll Surg 185:18–24

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fujino Y, Suzuki Y, Ajiki T et al (2002) Risk factors influencing pancreatic leakage and the mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy in a medium-volume hospital. Hepato-Gastroenterology 49:1124–1129

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hosotani R, Doi R, Imamura M (2002) Duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy reduces the risk of pancreatic leakage after pancreatoduodenectomy. World J Surg 26:99–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shrikhande SV, Qureshi SS, Rajneesh N et al (2005) Pancreatic anastomoses after pancreaticoduodenectomy: do we need further studies? World J Surg 29:1642–1649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kakita A, Takahashi T, Yoshida M et al (1996) A simpler and more reliable technique of pancreatojejunal anastomosis. Surg Today 26:532–535

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tajima Y, Matsuzaki S, Furui J et al (2004) Use of the time-signal intensity curve from dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate remnant pancreatic fibrosis after pancreaticojejunostomy in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 91:595–600

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula Definition et al (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138:8–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Batignani G, Fratini G, Zuckermann M et al (2005) Comparison of Wirsung-jejunal duct-to-mucosa and dunking technique for pancreatojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 4:450–455

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bartoli FG, Arnone GB, Ravera G et al (1991) Pancreatic fistula and relative mortality in malignant disease after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Review and statistical meta-analysis regarding 15 years of literature. Anticancer Res 11:1831–1848

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Poon RT, Lo SH, Fong D et al (2002) Prevention of pancreatic anastomotic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Am J Surg 183:42–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pratt WB, Maithel SK, Vanounou T et al (2007) Clinical and economic validation of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) classification scheme. Ann Surg 245:443–451

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Peng S, Wang J, Li J et al (2004) Binding pancreaticojejunostomy—a safe and reliable anastomosis procedure. HPB (Oxford) 6:154–160

    Google Scholar 

  20. Watanabe M, Usui S, Kajiwara H et al (2004) Current pancreatogastrointestinal anastomotic methods: results of a Japanese survey of 3109 patients. J Hepato-Biliary Pancreat Surg 11:25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pratt WB, Callery MP, Vollmer CM Jr (2008) Risk prediction for development of pancreatic fistula using the ISGPF classification scheme. World J Surg 32:419–428

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bassi C, Butturini G, Molinari E et al (2004) Pancreatic fistula rate after pancreatic resection. The importance of definitions. Dig Surg 21:54–59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sikora SS, Posner MC (1995) Management of the pancreatic stump following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 82:1590–1597

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Friess H, Malfertheiner P, Isenmann R et al (1996) The risk of pancreaticointestinal anastomosis can be predicted preoperatively. Pancreas 13:202–208

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Marcus SG, Cohen H, Ranson JH (1995) Optimal management of the pancreatic remnant after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 221:635–645

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Steer ML (2007) Exocrine pancreas. In: Townsend CM, Evers BM, Beauchamp RD, Mattox KL (eds) Sabiston textbook of surgery: the biological basis of modern surgical practice, 18th edn. W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp 1589–1623

    Google Scholar 

  27. Tanaka T, Matsugu Y, Fukuda Y (2002) Related use of ultrasonically activated shears improves the safety of pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Arch Surg 137:1258–1261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sugiyama M, Abe N, Izumisato Y et al (2001) Pancreatic transection using ultrasonic dissector in pancreatoduodenectomy. Am J Surg 182:257–259

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Okabayashi T, Hanazaki K, Nishimori I et al (2007) Pancreatic transection using a sharp hook-shaped ultrasonically activated scalpel. Langenbecks Arch Surg 393:1005–1008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Strasberg SM, Drebin JA, Mokadam NA et al (2002) Prospective trial of a blood supply-based technique of pancreaticojejunostomy: effect on anastomotic failure in the Whipple procedure. J Am Coll Surg 194:746–758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hayashibe A, Kameyama M (2007) The clinical results of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy in consecutive 55 cases. Pancreas 35:273–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ibrahim S, Tay KH, Launois B et al (2006) Triple-layer duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Dig Surg 23:296–302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Shinchi H, Takao S, Maemura K et al (2006) A new technique for pancreaticogastrostomy for the soft pancreas: the transfixing suture method. J Hepato-Biliary Pancreat Surg 13:212–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Murakami Y, Uemura K, Hayashidani Y et al (2008) No mortality after 150 consecutive pancreatoduodenctomies with duct-to-mucosa pancreaticogastrostomy. J Surg Oncol 97:205–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Peng SY, Mou YP, Liu YB et al (2003) Binding pancreaticojejunostomy: 150 consecutive cases without leakage. J Gastrointest Surg 7:898–900

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Oussoultzoglou E, Bachellier P, Bigourdan JM et al (2004) Pancreaticogastrostomy decreased relaparotomy caused by pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy compared with pancreaticojejunostomy. Arch Surg 139:327–335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. McKay A, Mackenzie S, Sutherland FR et al (2006) Meta-analysis of pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 93:929–936

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Poon RT, Fan ST, Lo CM et al (2007) External drainage of pancreatic duct with a stent to reduce leakage rate of pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 246:425–433

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kurosaki I, Hatakeyama K (2004) Omental wrapping of skeletonized major vessels after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Int Surg 89:90–94

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Maeda A, Ebata T, Kanemoto H et al (2005) Omental flap in pancreaticoduodenectomy for protection of splanchnic vessels. World J Surg 29:1122–1126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Konstadoulakis MM, Filippakis GM, Lagoudianakis E et al (2005) Intra-arterial bolus octreotide administration during Whipple procedure in patients with fragile pancreas: a novel technique for safer pancreaticojejunostomy. J Surg Oncol 89:268–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Shrikhande SV, Barreto G, Shukla PJ (2008) Pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: the impact of a standardized technique of pancreaticojejunostomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 393:87–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-7-1 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, 852-8501, Japan

    Yoshitsugu Tajima, Tamotsu Kuroki, Noritsugu Tsuneoka, Tomohiko Adachi, Taiichiro Kosaka, Tatsuya Okamoto, Mitsuhisa Takatsuki, Susumu Eguchi & Takashi Kanematsu

Authors
  1. Yoshitsugu Tajima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tamotsu Kuroki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Noritsugu Tsuneoka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tomohiko Adachi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Taiichiro Kosaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tatsuya Okamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mitsuhisa Takatsuki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Susumu Eguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Takashi Kanematsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoshitsugu Tajima.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tajima, Y., Kuroki, T., Tsuneoka, N. et al. Anatomy-Specific Pancreatic Stump Management to Reduce the Risk of Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreatic Head Resection. World J Surg 33, 2166–2176 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-009-0179-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-009-0179-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation